some short answers and comments to posts fromLynn Killingbeck,Jeremy Boden,Steve L,Stephen Montgomery-Smith

Lynn Killingbeck wrote: >QSCGZ wrote: >> >> why is most mathematical online-information only available in >> .ps or .dvi encrypted format ??? >> >> I assume , that .ps can handle pictures , greek letters , integral >> symbol etc. , but there are usually ways to do this in ASCII as well , >> with only small decrease of readability. >> >> (snip) >> >> disappointed , qscgz .

ASCII 224-235 . But I meant , that often Latin letters or indicescan be used instead of Greek ones with only small loss of readability.

>Integral symbols in ASCII? /S,$,I,INTEGRAL, | , /

>Oh, I can do etc. in ASCII - etc. - but that's about it. > >With small decrease (well, if you consider nearly >unintelligible as small...)...

most math usenet posts use ASCII , are they nearly unintelligible ? (for that reason)

>Perhaps you are trying to read these intermediate languages directly. If >so - don't do that! They are aimed at machine intelligibility, not at >human intelligibility. Use the appropriate viewer.

..with the already mentioned disadvantages

>I don't speak TeX or PostScript languages, but understand that each is >far more capable that plain text, when viewed with the appropriate >viewer. I've written small papers with mutliple integrals and loads of >super- and sub-script stuff (such fun things as COV material, taking >partial derivatives with respect to y' and y'', for example), and can't >imaging conveying the content in plain-vanilla ASCII. (I used the >equation editor from Microsoft Word, some old version - and, frankly, >getting the things to look reasonable was, using the proper technical >jargon, a bitch.) ASCII and readable and your list (pictures, greek >letters, integral symbol, etc.) don't live in the same universe!

but they can coexist. Maybe someone can test it ? Make .ps _and_ .txt versions available online,get it stored at searchengines and then count accesses/downloads !

------------------------------------------------------

Jeremy Boden wrote:

>In article <20000805050557.10077.00000765@ng-fz1.aol.com>, QSCGZ ><qscgz@aol.com> writes >> >>why is most mathematical online-information only available in >>.ps or .dvi encrypted format ??? >.pdf or .html is usually also available

I rarely find .html

>For typeset quality you will find .dvi to be (usually) the best option.

>It's more due to the fact that mathematicians tend to work in >Universities. These institutions tend to use Unix. This in turn strongly >favours the use of postscript printers.

>Perhaps you'd like to convert a few pages of your favourite algebra text >into ASCII and compare it with the original?

I'm a bit familiar with algebra-ascii , from newsgroup reading andcomputer programming. I don't consider it a big restriction.

---------------------------------------------------------

Steve L wrote :

>> it takes longer with modem and can't be read and answered online , >> like other emails. > >Sure it can. IE doesn't have any problem displaying .ps files for me. If >I wanted to comment on a complicated .ps file I'd probably drop into TeX >to describe some of the problems.

fine for you. But how many % of -say- sci.math.posters can do this too ?

>The .tex files aren't _that_ bad to read normally. > >> sci.math e.g. can live pretty well without pictures. > >In fact, it has to; sci.math is a no-binary-allowed group. On sci.math we >try to stick to a text-with-LaTeX-bits but if binary stuff is allowed, we >should use them -- and binaries should be allowed.

sometimes I see pics here , and it works.

>> If .txt can be converted to .tex and .tex can't be converted to .txt , >> then how can .tex be better ? (except for graphics) > >tex, properly compiled, can do everything plain text can do, and it can >do more.

keyword-search ?

>And if a person reads the abstract and finds that they want to read the >paper, they download the paper itself.

yes, but that's only -I guess- 20% of cases. You read lots ofabstracts before one download.

>>>... but now try to write a matrix,let's say a 50-by-50... >But when you compile it, it appears perfectly fine.

OK, but now write a computer program to read the values into an array.

>But let's say you >have a 50-by-50 matrix in which most of the elements in each row are >negative (but a different set for each row) -- when you display that >matrix in text format, unless your window is set much wider than 80 >characters (which is somewhat standard for newsreaders) you're going to >have to wrap or scroll.

yes, I get more than 80 characters per line. No big problem IMO.And you could also switch the display-modus.

>How do you work with matrices? When working with matrices, would [] >represent row and column indices?

>File size, if it's _reasonable_, isn't that much of a consideration > >Faster printing -- depends on the printer. > >Convertable -- there are programs to convert .tex to .dvi to .ps to .pdf >.. between just about any two formats you want, I'd imagine.

not to .txt , though.

>Let's say there are half a dozen papers, and each author is writing it in >plain text. Each author might use different conventions for how to write >integrals, functions, etc. Classifying them (which is what I think you're >thinking of using the machine readability for) will still be difficult.

some standards will establish soon. But remember , I did suggest to publishboth , .txt AND .ps (or .tex ...) .

>installed at all, try reading the HTML code for webpages rather than >reading that additional web browser software. Let's see how adept you can >be at viewing webpages from that, complete with pictures.

I use htmstrip , no pictures , though.

>>> .. why .tex files are not released it's too easy to change them >>> and claim that the file is yours.

not a math-specific problem. Imagine e.g. journalists would usesimilar codings in ezines for that reason ...

>We don't see a need to abandon a perfectly-good format (TeX and ps) and

I never told to do this. Use both. But often , once someone has it inTeX or ps he thinks , there is no more need for txt .

BTW. I had to delete lots of "=20" , "=2E" ,... (equal20,equal2E...) from your post. Was it TeX , that created them ?

------------------------------------------------------

Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:

>..x^y (with the carot), >.. suddenly I was unable to solve even the simplest equations. > >I{0 to oo} .... dx >that it would have actually set mathematics back a few years. > > students submitting their homwork as text >.. I find them hard to read, and usually full of mistakes, >which the student would not had made had >he used pen and paper.)

for paper and pencil calculations , of course , you/they shouldn'tuse carots , or I{} , or .. Only for displaying the result e.g. to newsgroups or webpagesor homework.

>Now TeX has really freed us. Anyone can post their >papers on the web, and anyone can freely read it.

with some additional effort the first time.

>Programs that typeset TeX, or preview dvi files, or >print them out, are free, and will operate on all but >the very oldest of equipment. (I found a 286 amply >powerful, although AMSLaTeX and LaTeX-2e killed it.) > >No-one can complain that TeX is elitist. Every effort

for non-mathematicians it might appear as such.

>has been made to make TeX and its related programs >as accessible as possible...